4 ms·
HN has flipped so quickly on saying how AI produces unreliable slop, to most people using it to replace junior devs at their org – something I was heavily criti
by kypro 1y ago
HN has flipped so quickly on saying how AI produces unreliable slop, to most people using it to replace junior devs at their org – something I was heavily criticised for saying orgs should be doing a few months back.
Progress doesn't end here either, imo CC is more a mid-level engineer with a top-tier senior engineer's knowledge. I think we're getting to the point where we can begin to replace the majority of engineers (even seniors) for just a handful of seniors engineers to prompt and review AI produced code and PRs.
Not quite there yet, of course, but definitely feeling that shift starting now... There's going to be huge productivity boosts for tech companies towards the end this year if we can get there.
Exciting times.
- dude250711 1y agoHow come CC is a crappy terminal instead of some super-nice environment built by Anthropic via CC itself? It should be capable of rebuilding VS Code but better, no?
- nikcub 1y agobecause their philosophy is that developers are tied to their editors and IDE's so you should be able to bring you're own. and they're right.
- dude250711 1y agoWhere are the awesome deeply-integrated add-ins/extensions for all popular IDEs then?
- steveklabnik 1y agoRight now, they have ones for VS: Code and JetBrains' various ones: https://docs.anthropic.com/en/docs/claude-code/ide-integrations https://docs.anthropic.com/en/docs/claude-code/ide-integrati...
- hooverd 1y agoWhere do the juniors come from?
- throw1235435 1y agoI think the point of the poster is that there's no need for them because as he puts it replace "the majority of engineers". Tech is about to be decimated - software as a field is about to shrink quite substantially. To be honest the way things are going it is possible IMO (although would severely disadvantage me) - 3 years ago given the amount of skill required and lifetime learning in it I would of never thought this. Why do you need juniors - well you may need them but with the oversatuation it will take maybe 20 years (a generation to retire) for the current crop of seniors to get exhausted given AI will decimate them too according to the OP. That's definitely a far enough away time for it to be someone else's problem - by then AI might be significantly better anyway; we could even have superintelligence and SWE jobs might be the least of our worries. Great for the owners of tech companies and non-tech companies using tech (many non-technical, capital based who now scale with less cost base); not so great for people with tech skills who invested for their future. Which is the goal of these AI companies. Your pain/unemployment/cost is their profit/economic surplus. To the OP its "exciting times" for capital - probably for many people however it seems like an impending nightmare is coming especially if they are relying on intellectual work to survive/provide/etc. Most CC articles on HN trend I've seen trend to the top; which shows it is definitely instigating either greed or fear in people. I would argue that "code" seems to be the most successful AI product to date - most others are just writing assistants, meme generators, risky operators, etc at least for me. Its code that seems to instigate this persistent fear. On a side note, at least for me, AI has personally dissuaded me from learning/investing more in this career as a senior engineer with almost 20 years experience. I hope I'm wrong.
- RamblingCTO 1y ago> CC is more a mid-level engineer with a top-tier senior engineer's knowledge. care to provide any proof for that? in my experience it's neither.